Posted
by
timothyon Thursday September 04, 2014 @09:27AM
from the do-not-necessarily-want dept.

Lucas123 (935744) writes A new software platform released by one of the nation's largest insurance roadside services providers will allow insurers to track drivers through smartphone sensors and geolocation services in order to offer good driver incentives or emergency roadside assistance. The tracking software is similar to technology currently offered by State Farm's In-Drive and Progressive's Snapshot program, but the latter uses a hardware collection device that plugs into a vehicle's standard OBDII onboard diagnostics port. The new software platform from Agero travels with the driver in and out of the car, so that if a customer is in an accident emergency services are still contacted.

My old employer - one of the biggest insurance firms in the UK - has been running stuff like this for years. A little app on your smartphone that analyses your driving style for minor infractions and squeals back to the company so they can produce evidence for why your premiums have shot up...
And of course to get it working they tested it on... the call center staff. Seriously, any call center staff who had company insurance had to agree to this sh1t being installed on their mobiles to qualify for the staff discount during its testing phase. And the claims of anonymisation of data for the testing were proven to be BS the day the leaderboards of "Who's the safest drivers in XXX team" started going up to shame staff members who weren't good little boys and girls.

I second the motion; fuck that. We're already 'tracked' in enough ways we (apparently) can't control, I'll be damned if I do it willingly. As is I'm getting fucking sick and fed up with feeling more and more every year like we're animals in a zoo or criminals in a prison.

I agree. fuck. that. shit. If they wanted to do usage based billing they could still respect the customer and provide a third-party odometer that goes in the car and tracks distance traveled. this could be limited so it's not tracking the routes, just the distances. also it may not be always connected. what's the point of saving a couple bucks on a ins plan if you pay more for a sim? maybe it could use whispernet like kindle if it just has to send out a bit of info every once and a while. or sms.

There are already limited use insurance plans. I have one for my jeep that in the 3 1/2 years of ownership I have only put ~10,000 mile on. I can drive that vehicle at most 5000 miles a year and every year they call to get the mileage that I just read off the odometer. The last time I paid it it cost $47 for 6 months.

As for what I pay for comprehensive with a $500 deductible on my daily driver ('02 BMW 325i) I pay like $225 every 6 months. On the other hand after my sister was getting into a substantial

Only an issue if somewhere down the line this kind of policy becomes compulsory.

Only an issue when somewhere down the line this kind of policy becomes compulsory.

The vast majority of the population believes the "I have nothing to hide so I have nothing to fear" bullshit that the authorities are peddling in oh-so-many propagandistic ways. "Be a good little citizen, and you'll never come to harm!" So soon, almost everybody and his dog will sign up for this "money saving" Trojan horse, and then it will be impossible for anyone to buy insurance without consenting to the insurance companies

This is just another attack surface on my privacy and in case of OBD-II devices on my safety.

Insurances are not in business to save you money, they are also no in business of securing data or massive distributed sensor networks. Best case scenario - you will save $5/mo while your car/cellphone ends up sending out spam, worst case scenario you will die in a flaming wreck when someone in CN remotely turns your auto-parking feature while you are driving at 75mph.

I wonder if this will be like the "consumer loyalty cards" at the grocery store;1) Lower price with loyalty card.2) Raise Prices such that those with loyalty card are paying the same old price and others are penalized.3) Establish in customer's minds that giving up data about their habits SAVES them money.

The "you can have a discount if" policies from Insurance companies will likely be followed by subtle increase in rates.If you want privacy, you can pay ridiculous amounts of money.

Establish in customer's minds that giving up data about their habits SAVES them money.

I've noticed that several grocery stores in my area are now doing frequent promotions like "Buy 5, get $5 off" with a motley collection of products. Undoubtedly sourced from the loyalty cards. Rarely worth a shit for me, since even getting to 5 isn't worthwhile.

The OBD-II readers aren't a safety threat. They only monitor sensor readings and special modes for updating ECUs cannot be accessed when a vehicle is moving or by general purpose diagnostic devices which these readers present themselves as. Airbag systems are implemented on a completely separate network using a special low-latency protocol.

The OBD-II dongles are not a threat until Metasploit module exploiting this overflow or that out of bound write comes out and cars start crashing. OBD of modern cars have been successfully exploited, considering that cars can easily stay on the road 15+ years and automotive industry only now started taking rudimentary first steps to secure it, it will be 20+ years until such dongles will be safe to use for general public.

The OBD-II dongles are not a threat until Metasploit module exploiting this overflow or that out of bound write comes out and cars start crashing. OBD of modern cars have been successfully exploited, considering that cars can easily stay on the road 15+ years and automotive industry only now started taking rudimentary first steps to secure it, it will be 20+ years until such dongles will be safe to use for general public.

The AT&T telematics system (that the Progressive Snapshot system runs on) is internal to AT&T and there have been no credible threats to its integrity. Does that mean it's totally secure? Of course not. But your hand-waving of "oh someone will just start pwning them with metasploit! and then you will see!!!!11" is completely uncalled for and uninformed. You might as well suggest that drivers' cellphones that get "hacked" can then "hack into" the Bluetooth interface on late model cars and totally

The above scenario is actually not as far-fetched as you think. There are proof-of-concept hacks of car infotainment systems over Bluetooth, and there are confirmed cases of infotainment systems directly connected to CANBUS giving attackers access to vehicle systems. Clearly, not all cars are so badly designed, but some are. So it is possible to chain cellphone-bluetooth-CANBUS and end up in a fiery crash.

They only monitor sensor readings and special modes for updating ECUs cannot be accessed when a vehicle is moving or by general purpose diagnostic devices

Except that most PCMs will happily take a reset any old time, including while the vehicle is in motion. You might not be able to engage in sudden unplanned acceleration, but you may well be able to cause the engine to die, depending on how the PCM is designed.

Further, you might not be able to reflash the PCM while the vehicle is in motion (generally you need key on, engine off for that) but a) you might be able to kill it and then reflash it, and b) that's really not relevant because there's still things yo

Or you could just blast speed reading of 0km/h and then engage electronic parking gear, or auto-parking module, or ABS diagnostic mode. You might even be able to deploy air bags, but I am not 100% sure on that one.

We have noticed that in the past 30 days you have parked twice near a bar. We regret to inform you that as a result your premium increased by GAZILLION DOLLARS and this information was added to your permanent driving record so you will never be able to get insurance anywhere else again.

First, misusing the apostrophe is a mark of ignorance, not idiocy. Second, ignorance of the fine points of english is not a sensible, polite or even intelligent thing to accuse a writer of, if the writer's native language is perhaps not english.

As long as is optional, is interesting to have it considering that the driver will not always be able to call for help in an emergency (And from the standpoint of first responders is also interesting that a car can automatically call for help when involved in an accident).

Get the consumers used to the idea of being tracked and lead them in the direction you want to go with a carrot in the form of a tiny financial incentive (make up for the lost revenue by increasing insurance rates in general so these "savings" are swallowed up by higher average costs).

Then once you have enough people subscribed to the tracking, start making the tracking a part of any plan for/new/ users (possibly with an option to stop being tracked after a few years, with a substantial rate hike of course). After all, the insurance company has no idea if you are a good driver or not so it is only in their best interest for them to gather as much information on you as they can. After all, the company is taking a big risk by offering you insurance, you understand.

Later, force tracking on any existing users who don't already have it. Stop offering any discounts for its use; if the consumer wants insurance, they better prepare to have their every move tracked.

Meanwhile, make sure to use all this collected information for the company's maximum financial benefit. Sift it for every possible marketing use. Sell it to other companies. Deny coverage because it incriminates the user without checking to see if it is actually accurate. That sort of thing.

This is the way it always works, creeping slowly ahead to the detriment of the customer. The only way to stop this sort of thing is to squash it before it gets started.

This seems like one of those situations where the "free market" would actually be useful. Want to sell your soul, er, data to save $5/mo? Go ahead. Or go with Company Y who have pledged not to institute such a requirement over privacy/security concerns.

States requiring car insurance does hamper the market, of course, so perhaps legislation now that would outlaw it is for the best.

Of course, even if companies make it mandatory, they won't actually make it "mandatory". That would lead to outcry and Congressio

It's a free market; consumers can lobby Congress just as much as any corporation can. Of course, if the consumers of the world start organizing and taking collective action, that will only show that they are just a bunch of unpatriotic Communists trying to destroy the free market.

But SCOTUS ruled that money is speech, so you have to outbid (either out-yell or out-spend) the other side. I'm not sure what the exchange rate is.

More seriously, how often do you see a report of "Big industry lobbyists push for X, general population pushes for Y. Congress goes with Y"? I realize it happens occasionally, but it's rare. Hell, most of the legitimate reporting on the Comcast/TW merger acknowledges that the general population is massive opposed, yet it will probably be approved regardless.

Then if you ARE in an accident, they will deny your claim and if you fight it in court they will charge you with insurance fraud to encourage you to settle for little or nothing. If you're going to take on the insurance company you might as well tape a throw-away phone to the under-carriage of an insurance executive's sports car. When they try to jack up your rates for bad driving, ask them if VP Joe is paying the same rate - because if he's not he ought to be.

I"m in the dumb phone camp as well and thinking about it while by law I'm mandated to have insurance... The last thing my insurance paid out for was some glass fixer after a rock came up off the road and took a sliver out of it. That was over 5 years ago and I have to go back another 7 or 8 years past that since I've had any other issues they have paid out for. Yet... I pay $80/month and have been for at least a decade... So I've paid them at least $9600 over a decade and basically cost them nothing... I'm

I ride my bike a lot. Unless I'm doing 65 on the freeway, how do they know I'm driving to the grocery store instead of riding my bike? The route is flat and through a residential area, I average 20 MPH there and back in a 25 MPH zone.

I ride my bike a lot. Unless I'm doing 65 on the freeway, how do they know I'm driving to the grocery store instead of riding my bike? The route is flat and through a residential area, I average 20 MPH there and back in a 25 MPH zone.

Easy, you're going too slow. Your 0-20 KPH time is around 20-30 seconds, you will go through red lights and there will be a large line of their other customers being held up behind you.

i haven't had an accident in almost 20 yearsi never run red lightsi'm not in a constant hurry like most of the idiots i see in NYCi'll gladly take a discount in exchange for proof that i'm a safe driver. i'm at the point where i'm thinking of recording my driving like they do in russia just in case i get hit or hit someone stopping in the street out of the blue for no reason

The question is what habits are rewarded or punished. I think the insurance company should be required to provide full disclosure on exactly what is monitored and how the rate adjustment calculation is performed. Then the consumer can make an informed decision on if it will help or not.

Don't know about this app, but Progressive and State Farm do tell you what they monitor. State Farm (at least) also provides you with a 'dashboard' so you can see the data, along with how it will affect your rates.

Progressive monitors hard braking, miles driven per day, and how often you drive between midnight and 4AM.

State Farm monitors braking, acceleration, left and right turns, time of day vehicle is driven, and speed over 80MPH

I somewhat agree with you here. There are a few caveats though. Will the insurance company furnish the data to law enforcement on request or court order. Black box data in cars is typically at the vehicle owners discretion to be provided in any criminal or civil case, or insurance claim. The vehicles owner has the right to decline access to that data regardless of the circumstances (although that will make you more of a suspect in some cases). Now you are streaming that data to a third party, who can p

Yes, it really is a question. Simply due to the fact that there are laws and rules in place to prevent law enforcement, or even opposing defendants from obtaining that information to use against you, similar to the 5th Amendment.
I guess a better way to ask the question would be will the insurance companies follow those same rules as it relates to the same data, or is there fine print buried in your contract that says they can do with it as they please.

well, considering that recent history has shown corporate america doesn't hesitate to hand over all personal data to govt authorities at the request, never mind a court order, i think the answer is a resounding yes.

the dollars will have to be significant, but in most states it takes some really crazy driving to get hit with a criminal charge in an accident. like going 70mph in a 30mph urban or residential environment, killing someone and then crying innocent how you didn't see them

I would definitely recommend getting a camera to protect yourself. It's unfortunate, but some drivers will flat-out lie about what happened to cause a crash and try to blame you for their mistake. If you have video evidence they can't pull crap like that.

This is why I have thought about getting a dash cam as well as a rear facing one. I must be getting old as I have noticed the number of teenagers who want to ride up on my bumper, cut me off, swerve into my lane, or otherwise be obnoxious on the road towards me has gone up in the last few weeks. Then toss in the inevitable police law breaker (you know the ones like the state trooper who passes you like you are standing still when you are at freeway speed without their siren or cherries on) that crop up fair

Old people. Not all of them, but a subset of them. I see them in various lanes all day. Many of them are actually good enough to tuck over towards the exits someplace and not bother anyone. They're getting amazing mileage and they're good people, but of course they're not the ones you notice most readily, are they?

Also, some young couples, and some mountain bikers. After singletrack, very little you can do on a public road feels fast, mostly because you don't have trees going by (relatively) inches from you

Sorry, but isn't there a law about distracted driving? So why not adhere to the rule and be a good little boy/girl and shut the damn thing off while driving. Turn it on when parked. They can't complain about it then since you are "just complying with the law". Oh, and if you need a GPS for your job, bring your own dash mount style. Give the fuckers nothing...

But if you need to look at my odometer from time to time, I'm fine with that. If I break down I'll just use my old style phone to call for a friend of mine to come help me.

Also:

technology
noun
1) the application of scientific knowledge for practical purposes, especially in industry."advances in computer technology"
2) machinery and equipment developed from the application of scientific knowledge.
3) the branch of knowledge dealing with engineering or applied sciences.
No, this doesn't sound like wh

Your health insurance provider should have direct real time insight into your sexual behavior so they can tweak your premiums accordingly. If you don't suck dicks in the club every night then you have nothing to hide.

I can't wait to receive discount for being a good driver. By tracking my usage pattern on my phone, insurance companies will be surprised how good am I when I'm behind the wheel. They will all fight to get me as a customer.
In turn, I will go out to pay a $25 cheapo phone and tell them that is my main phone. They can track it day and night, the phone will never get used whether I'm behind the wheel or in my house:-)
I can't wait.

There are some things (very few) in this world that I simply accept to be inevitable. I predict that the cost of having non-tracked auto insurance will increase greatly in relation to the cost of tracked auto insurance. It will become costly to hold onto 100% privacy in your automobile transportation habits.

While I have the preference of not being tracked whatsoever, what limitations would you propose within such a tracking system to preserve as much privacy as possible while also promoting the risk analysi

This is just one more way for the insurance companies to track you and provide you with insurance premiums based on your "driving history/usage". You're premiums probably won't go down - they will be "adjusted" to the new rate based on acquired data.
And you will likely be charged a "service" fee for allowing them to collect and sift through your personal driving/gps data.
It wouldn't surprise me at all if insurance companies started charging per kilometer - much like how ISP's now charge per gigabyte in

Perhaps you or your area is different from mine, but I often see cyclists being borderline suicidal, and the motorists being excessively generous.

Regardless, there is really no way currently to monitor how a driver reacts to a cyclist. At least, not in a way that encourages safety, such as hard braking when one jumps out in front of the car (yes, I see it regularly)